Attachment to Independent Case Review Report For CDRU #6299 Case file #198-2347.

Material Examiner: Malone (RQ)

Remarks:

Case resulted in a guilty plea, no testimony transcript.

CRM-28326

INDEPENDENT CASE REVIEW REPORT

Independent Review conducted by: Steve Robertson

Area(s) of Expertise: Hair and Fiber Review commenced at: 12:00 PM (Time), 12/04/03 (Date) File #: 198-2347

Laboratory #(s): 20412074, 20510019

a ,

Examiner(s) & Symbols

Reviewed Not Reviewed: Reviewed Not Reviewed xo a a

o xa Oo

oO a D Materials Reviewed Trial testimony transcript(s) of: None

Testimony Date(s): Laboratory Report(s): Laboratory Number: 20412074, 20510019 Date: May I1, 1982

Laboratory Number: Date:

Laboratory Number: Date:

Examiner Bench Notes of: RQ

Laboratory Number: 20412074, 20510019

‘Page 1° of 3

——=>

Initials: Suey CRM-28327

Was any other material reviewed? XQ ‘Yes O No

If yes, please identify and/or describe the material: submitting agency letter dated 4/1/82.

Results of Review

File #: 198-2347 Item or Specimen # Reviewed: Q1-Q8, K1-K3

a —

Review of Laboratory Report(s) and Bench Notes:

Note: Numbered comments are required below or on additional pages for any "No" or "Unable to Determine" Responses

1) Did the examiner perform the appropriate tests in a scientifically acceptable manner, based on the methods, protocols, and analytic techniques available at the time of the original examination(s)? OYes ONo XO Unable to Determine

Are the examination results set forth in the laboratory report(s) supported and adequately documented in the bench notes? OYes XQNo_ OG Unable to Determine

i

Review of Testimony:

Note: Numbered comments are required below or on additional pages for any "No" or "Unable to Determine" Responses

Xo Transcript not available.

3) Testimony consistent with the laboratory report(s)? oYes GNo oa Unable to Determine

4) Testimony consistent with the bench notes? 0 Yes ONo 0 Unable to Determine

5) Testimony within bounds of examiner's expertise? OYes ONo O Unable to Determine

~ -~‘Cominients © ~~ (Set forth by above question #, if applicable. Use “Additional Comments” Sheet, if needed)

i i

File #: 198-2347

#1: With microscopic hair comparison, one cannot deicciniine from the notes that the examination was conducted

in an appropriate manner.

#2. The results are not adequately documented in the notes. The notes are not dated and are in pencil instead of ink. Abbreviations are used that are hard to interpret. The microspectrophotometry spectra are not

labeled correctly.

rn

Review completed at: 12:30 PM (Time), 12/04/03 (Date)

Total time spent conducting review (to nearest 1/4 hour): 0.50 hrs.

I hereby certify that I conducted this review in an independent, unbiased manner and that the results of my review are fully documented on this report consisting of a total of 3 _ pages.

Dec. 4, 2003

(Signature) ia (Date)

Page .3 ° of 3

zg. Initials: Ht